Discovering More Neglect & Lies

This post displays that not all of us who cared for a vulnerable elderly parent and adopted sibling, have a supportive family.

As my mother’s funeral approached I contacted one of my estranged sisters who are claimed to be in regular contact and visiting our vulnerable brother, for her and my other estranged sisters to make arrangements for our brother to attend our mother’s funeral, due to Priory Group & LA ignoring my requests until mere minutes before the funeral to inform me of their refusal to allow my brother of attending with me.

Below is the email response I received from the estranged sister. Knowing this, I note care records for years have greater false content than already revealed. And Herefordshire Council social care staff were willing and to and did use deceptive claims about family members.

The above email, from the same estranged sister, who in social care records, made an allegation she would not visit our mother because of my behaviour.
My behaviour, I would not speak with my estranged sisters and sit in another room when they did rarely and briefly visit our mother, for mere minutes.
The same estranged sister who had LPA with me yet abandoned our mother and her obligation to her.
Even at the end of her life, my mother had none of her daughter’s comforting her during her last days or hours while she slowly died in hospital.
I will never forgive my estranged older siblings for their abandonment of our mother and vulnerable adopted brother, nor social care staff from directors down who have over recent years been complicit in fabricating their distressing and vexatious litany of lies and misinformation.

Refusal of Attending Our Mother’s Funeral

A bit of a long post, but necessary to detail how The Priory Group disregarded published government guidance and legislation regarding COVID-19, the MCA and the best interests of my vulnerable sibling.

Below is The Priory Group director of risk and safety, DW’s email of 14th April 2020, regarding denying my brother of attending our mother’s funeral service with other family members and me, minutes before the funeral service took place, followed by my reply and assessment of DW’s email.

DWattsFuneral arrangements_attendance_Redacted


My reply, to DW, was sent via post:

Reply to David Watts Distressing email of 14-04-2020_Redacted


There are several concerns with DW’s email of 14th April 2020, some of which are detailed below.

Paragraph 1

In consideration of DW’s distressing past deceit and attempt to intimidate me, I believe DW’s statement of condolences is merely feigned.

Paragraph 2

DW says following discussions with social care, taking into account government guidance, best interests, and facilitation. I address this in four brief parts below.

a. Herefordshire Council social care personnel did not attempt to contact me regarding funeral arrangements and my brother, between 25th March 2020, the date our mother passed away, to 14th April 2020, the date of the funeral. And regardless of me being an interested party in the health and welfare of my brother. As a side note, I had previously attempted to arrange for my brother to come home and go from there to the hospital two weeks before restrictions came into force, which was ignored by Priory Group and Herefordshire Council.

b. Government guidance on funerals attendance had not changed since the enactment of The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 which came into force at 1.00 p.m. on 26th March 2020. While there were other specifics changed, attendance at funeral services and travelling to them did not and has not to date. Government guidance also stated travelling to attend a funeral was regarded as ‘essential travel’.

A small section of The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 regarding funerals:

Restrictions on movement 6.—(1) During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse. (2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), a reasonable excuse includes the need— (g) to attend a funeral of— (i) a member of the person’s household, (ii) a close family member, or (iii) if no-one within sub-paragraphs (i) or (ii) are attending, a friend

c. While there is more I could detail regarding this paragraph, a small part is DW’s disregard of relevance and his statement of considering what is in my brother’s best interest. I point to the legislation which DW has clearly ignored; section 4 of The Mental Capacity Act. Reference:

Paragraph 3

While DW makes claims that my brother would not be able to understand restrictions on social distancing and speculates how my brother may interpret such, the sheer lack of DW’s and his colleagues’ knowledge and understanding of my brother and his communication, having been at The Priory group placement for almost seven years against family wishes, and what my bother is actually capable and able to understand and communicate with adequate support, is distressingly apparent. Regarding Keeping a distance, my brother always understood and had no issue keeping a safe range if he or my mother were, in the past, unwell.

Paragraph 4

This paragraph is of concern as DW interprets quotes a small and specific part of government guidance, yet chooses to omit part regarding who could attend a funeral under government guidance at the time and legislation. DW also contradicts himself claiming it is unknown if my brother would tolerate wearing any kind of PPE, yet also claims PPE is not appropriate for my brother; denying my sibling of protection.
DW’s statement of my brother biting nails and rubbing his mouth also conflict with his past statements and claims, including regarding my concerns of the recurring neglect of basic hygiene and two-year-long recurring impetigo which he, advocate and social care staff ignored.

Paragraph 5

DW’s statement is pure speculation and implies those attending the funeral service were infected with COVID-19 or were infectious

Paragraph 6

DW states it is too high a risk for my brother to attend and refers to the physical wellbeing of others. Yet, not one person attending the funeral service had COVID-19 or displayed signs of the virus and kept to relevant guidance. Regarding my brother’s emotional wellbeing and knowing how he is at such events, I consider DW’s claim derisive and offensive to both my brother and me.

A small section taken from government guidance before April 2020:

  • mourners who are self-isolating for 14 days due to someone in their household being unwell with symptoms of coronavirus (COVID-19) but are not symptomatic themselves should be facilitated to attend the funeral in person should they wish to do so, with processes put in place to minimise the risk of transmission
  • mourners who are clinically vulnerable or in a shielded group should also be facilitated to attend, with processes put in place to minimise the risk of transmission

Paragraph 7

DW nor his colleagues attempted to make contact by phone, Skype or other means. The only messages left on the landline, which was not in use since my mother died, were two few second long messages from a claimed to be social care employee. The answer machine messages, picked up on my return later that day after the funeral service.

To this date, I have been unable and not permitted to contact or see my brother, including via Skype, to tell him of our mother’s passing due to the various claims and excuses made by The Priory Group.


I believe DW’s letter is in part, just one more distressing attempt to alienate me from my brother. Since The Priory Group, with the help of specific Herefordshire Council social care staff, attempted and failed to fabricate criminal offences against me; which in turn was punishment for discovering neglect & abuse of my brother and helping him record and document what was happening H house.


Brother denied of attending our mother’s funeral

Below is a redacted copy of an email I received from David Watts of The Priory Group, just 30 minutes before my mother’s funeral service. I had sent several requests to The Priory Group, for my brother to attend the funeral, yet all remained ignored until refusal mere minutes before the funeral. It is the second funeral my brother has been denied of attending.

DWattsFuneral arrangements_attendance_Redacted


I will update this post in future to expand on the contradiction, misinformation and concerns in DW’s email, and woeful understanding of my brother.






Denied of support with phone calls

In 2019, I submitted a SAR to The Priory Group; in it, one of the pieces of data I asked for was:
A certified true copy of H House telephone call log history for calls to me on the numbers for the period 2nd June 2018 to 4th August 2019.

The below has taken an extended time to obtain after The Priory Group ignored my request, and the Information Commissioner’s Office became involved, once again.

While my brother was claimed to be supported with making calls home, This particular Priory Group communication shows just one outbound call was made in 2018-2019.



Similarly, we have only been allowed Skype video calls for approximately 3 minutes since his account was created over five years ago, with various excuses made for denying him access, and us contact.

I am constantly finding with regard to the organisations involved with my family and me, the more they lie, the more they reveal.

Letter to Onside Advocacy regarding private & family life

At the beginning of February 2020, I was informed of my brother’s social worker and advocate surveilling of family home visits.

Below is my letter to the CEO of onside advocacy and the advocate who I was informed made the accusation against me.

Onside advocacy intrusion of private life_Redacted


It is not the first time this particular advocacy service or social worker has deceived, mislead or attempted to alienate or defame; confiscating property to prevent communication with my brother.
I previously had to contact Herefordshire Council regarding intrusion into my brother, mother, and my private and family life. Reporting such to a solicitor, due to my brother’s social worker making spurious claims. The same social worker who incidentally attempted, with a manager, to fabricate criminal offences against me and failed, confiscating a computer being taken to my brother. To date, Herefordshire Council has ignored my letters and emails requesting to return the property to me.

2020 and Lies Continue

On 10th February 2020, my brother came home for a short time & I met the tenth, in three years, manager of his Priory Group ‘care’ home.
Within two minutes, the manager SK had lied to me and further contradicted them self regarding Skype contact, once I mentioned Skype log files are stored for all missed and received calls.

My sibling and family denied regular Skype contact by The Priory Group and Herefordshire Council since 4th December 2013, when my brother was, without preparation or notice, moved from a relatively close-by home against family wishes, out of county and to The Priory Group ‘care’ home.

We have had a total of 3 minutes and 3 seconds of Skype contact since 4th December 2013, with various spurious reasons given for lack of communication by Priory and local authority staff.
And most recently not permitted contact since our last brief call on 10th August 2018, which lasted 1 minute 1 second before the then manager AW arm suddenly appeared reaching across the screen and disconnected us.

Below is a screenshot of Skype calls, showing the last call made and received by either of us.

The above is another example of the reality of the care system and lack of respect for vulnerable individuals and their family members rights.


Still denied of Skype contact

The 10th August 2018.

That was the last day The Priory Group allowed my brother Skype contact with me and our mother and for a mere 1 minute 1 second.
In my opinion, this makes a mockery of the courts and a court order contact schedule that was placed on contact.

Another example of how our mother, who fostered many children over decades, and myself are regarded by Priory Group, their staff, and my local authority.

I remain hopeful of challenging court decisions one day and seeking justice against The Priory Group and particular deceitful and dishonest social care and advocacy staff.


Worcestershire Council letter September 2019

Below is a letter I received in September 2019, from Worcestershire County Council who declined my invitation to meet with their social care staff and my solicitor to review evidence regarding Priory Group staff.

Did the CQC not share the evidence, as they told me they would, or was it shared and ignored by two local authorities?

J Aldred Worcestershire CC Refusal Letter 03-09-2019_Redacted


Below is my email response to the above letter, to which I have had no response to date.

Gmail -JAldred refusal letter of 03-09-2019_Redacted



Claims of Mental Health Issues and Harassement 2016

Below is a list of some of my bullet points for a meeting held in 2016, which my local authority told me was a best interests meeting regarding the recurring neglect, abuse, and inadequate care and support of my vulnerable brother.

Some days later, I complained about the ‘professionals’ who failed to provide promised information and uphold agreements made at the meeting. They then later giving varying versions of meeting events in other letters and emails.

I, unfortunately, discovered there was no intention to move my sibling back home, or to an adequate and suitable care home closer to family, nor address concerns.

As you will note in the email below, 

  • For complaining about the negligence of the social worker and advocate, I was accused of having a mental health issue.
  • For emailing to request information and arrange family home visits, I was accused of harassment and ‘doing my own thing’.

While I continue to witness my sibling regress and deteriorate under local authority and Priory Group ‘care’, the above is just one of many in a catalogue of failures and lies made by supposed professionals that my sibling and I have endured over the years. 

I believe the email can evidence local authority priority is to support the provider and NOT the vulnerable in their care and their family members who raise concerns.

Bullet points for meeting 2016

DBest Interests Concerns Meeting 09-2016 (Bullet Points)_Redacted


S Sibanda email regarding meeting

Sarah Sibanda email regarding meeting concerns_Redacted


For the interest of the public, particularly those who have loved ones in care, the person who wrote the email left and went to a different provider:

Do I forgive them for denying my vulnerable brother visits home and being a party to covering up what happened? Absolutely not.